The Supreme Court of India has directed the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) to accommodate candidates suffering from ‘mental illness’ and ‘specific learning disability’ in Group ‘C’ posts. The Court held that following the 2021 notification by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, there is no impediment to appointing these candidates, even directing the creation of supernumerary posts if the original vacancies have been exhausted.
Background
The case originated from the Combined Graduate Level Examination-2018 (CGLE-2018) conducted by the SSC. Two vacancies for the post of ‘Auditor’ in the office of the CAG were earmarked for the ‘Other PwD’ category.
Respondent No. 3, Shri Amit Yadav, a candidate with a 55% disability certificate for ‘mental illness’, successfully cleared all tiers of the examination and was recommended for the post of ‘Auditor’. However, on September 28, 2021, the CAG returned his dossier to the SSC, stating that the post of ‘Auditor’ was not identified as suitable for Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD) suffering from ‘mental illness’.
Shri Amit Yadav challenged this before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Delhi, which directed the CAG to constitute a Medical Board and offer appointment if found fit. This order was subsequently set aside by the High Court of Delhi in a Writ Petition filed by the CAG. The appellant, Sudhanshu Kardam, who suffers from ‘Specific Learning Disability’ (SLD) and had a similar matter pending before the CAT, approached the Supreme Court against the High Court’s decision.
Arguments and Legal Framework
The primary legal issue revolved around the identification of posts suitable for specific disabilities under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act).
The candidates relied on Gazette Notification No. 38-16/2020-DD-III dated January 4, 2021, issued by the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (DEPwD). This notification updated the list of posts identified as suitable for PwBD, expressly including ‘mental illness’ and ‘specific learning disability’ as suitable categories for certain Group ‘C’ posts.
During the proceedings, the Court noted:
“Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, learned Additional Solicitor General, sought two weeks’ time to obtain instructions in the matter with regard to accommodating the petitioner and respondent no.3 in appropriate categories in light of the notification dated 04.01.2021.”
Court’s Analysis
The CAG filed an additional affidavit on February 16, 2026, admitting that while the posts were not initially identified for these disabilities in 2018, the rule position had changed. The affidavit stated:
“Pursuant to such change in the rule position, Respondent No. 1 is ready and willing to accommodate the Petitioner and Respondent No. 3 in Group C posts identified as suitable.”
The CAG further submitted that they would undertake the appointments subject to the recommendation and transfer of dossiers from the SSC.
Based on this admission, the Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta observed:
“Evidently, on a perusal of the affidavit filed by respondent No.1 – CAG, it is clear that now, there remains no impediment whatsoever for accommodating the appellant before us as well as R3- Shri Amit Yadav, against Group ‘C’ posts which have been identified as suitable to their disabilities.”
The Decision
The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal with the following directions:
- Forwarding of Dossiers: The SSC is directed to forward the dossiers of Sudhanshu Kardam and Amit Yadav to the CAG within two weeks.
- Appointment: Upon receipt of the dossiers, the CAG must consider both candidates for appointment against Group ‘C’ posts.
- Supernumerary Posts: The Court provided a safeguard for the candidates’ employment, stating:
“In case the posts advertised vide notification dated 5th May, 2018 have already been filled, the respondents shall create supernumerary posts for accommodating both these candidates.” - Effective Date: The appointments shall take effect from the date of their joining.
Case Details:
- Case Title: Sudhanshu Kardam v. Comptroller and Auditor General of India and Ors.
- Case No.: Civil Appeal No(s). OF 2026 (Diary No. 43728/2025)
- Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta
- Date : March 12, 2026
